@Carl: Carl, If you are going to quote Ellen White then

Comment on Are LSU professors breaking the 8th commandment? by Jonathan Smith.

@Carl:
Carl,

If you are going to quote Ellen White then quoter her on this subject. You are happy to find some unrelated quote and have not mentioned what is relevant.

Quite frankly, if you believe Ellen White received inspiration from God, you have no choice but to drop any affection for or fascination with evolution. And don’t sit on the fence either. There are many non-Christians and non SDA Christians who have long realised that there is no such thing as theistic evolution.

You cannot massage the Bible to suit your thoughts – you discard yours and adopt the Bible’s clear, unambiguous position which is ably supported by Ellen White.

Chapter IX. – Disguised Infidelity

I was then carried back to the creation and was shown that the first week, in which God performed the work of creation in six days and rested on the seventh day, was just like every other week. The great God in his days of creation and day of rest, measured off the first cycle as a sample for successive weeks till the close of time. “These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created.” God gives us the productions of his work at the close of each literal day. Each day was accounted of him a generation, because every day he generated or produced some new portion of his work. On the seventh day of the first week God rested from his work, and then blessed the day of his rest, and set it apart for the use of man. The weekly cycle of seven literal days, six for labor, and the seventh for rest, which has been preserved and brought down through Bible history, originated in the great facts of the first seven days. {3SG 90.1}

When God spake his law with an audible voice from Sinai, he introduced the Sabbath by saying, “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.” He then declares definitely what shall be done on the six days, and what shall not be done on the seventh. He then, in giving the reason for thus observing the week, points them back to his example on the first seven days of time. “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day, wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.” This reason appears beautiful and forcible when we understand the record of creation to mean literal days. The first six days of each week are given to man in which to labor, because God employed the same period of the first week in the work of creation. The seventh day God has reserved as a day of rest, in commemoration of his rest during the same period of time after he had performed the work of creation in six days. {3SG 90.2}

But the infidel supposition, that the events of the first week required seven vast, indefinite periods for their accomplishment, strikes directly at the foundation of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. It makes indefinite and obscure that which God has made very plain. It is the worst kind of infidelity; for with many who profess to believe the record of creation, it is infidelity in disguise. It charges God with commanding men to observe the week of seven literal days in commemoration of seven indefinite periods, which is unlike his dealings with mortals, and is an impeachment of his wisdom. {3SG 91.1}

Infidel geologists claim that the world is very much older than the Bible record makes it. They reject the Bible record, because of those things which are to them evidences from the earth itself, that the world has existed tens of thousands of years. And many who profess to believe the Bible record are at a loss to account for wonderful things which are found in the earth, with the view that creation week was only seven literal days, and that the world is now only about six thousand years old. These, to free themselves of difficulties thrown in their way by infidel geologists, adopt the view that the six days of creation were six vast, indefinite periods, and the day of God’s rest was another indefinite period; making senseless the fourth commandment of God’s holy law. Some eagerly receive this position, for it destroys the force of the fourth commandment, and they feel a freedom from its claims upon them. They have limited ideas of the size of men, animals and trees before the flood, and of the great changes which then took place in the earth. {3SG 91.2}

Table of Contents

1 Jonathan Smith Also Commented
- 1.1 Recent Comments by Jonathan Smith
2 Related

Jonathan Smith Also Commented

Are LSU professors breaking the 8th commandment?
Carl and Bravus are trying desperately hard to find justification for holding on to the religion of evolution. It is rather sad and disappointing that these men (at least Bravus) attended SDA schools and pretend that they are believers in God.

What they must come to face with is that no matter the alleged evidence in favour of evolution, it contradicts the word of God and thus they have arrived at a crossroads. Here they do not run side by side by veer sharply in different directions. The two cannot be followed unless the person evolves into a many bodied organism.

It is also sad that Bravus believes in natural selection (NS). NS is simply a hand waving sleight of hand trick like the hocus pocus of a three card man to distract the audience from the empty and unrealistic promises of their faith.

When you read about the great unity and agreement, which exists among the scientists regarding evolution, don’t believe a word of it. Each one is busily experimenting with new speculative possibilities as to how the changes took place and then abandoning them, as they appear more and more ridiculous. The one basic tenet they do agree on is that there was no divine fiat creation as described in the Bible.

Ask these questions about natural selection: What is the evidence that it can actually reproduce all the changes involved in the transition from amoeba [monad] to man? Is there scientific proof that it can even make one small change? When it comes right down to answering those questions, the spokesmen for evolution do some of the fanciest footwork in semantics you ever saw and make some of the most amazing admissions. Even though Simpson supports natural selection as a factor, he recognizes the scarcity of evidence in these words:

â€œIt might be argued that the theory is quite unsubstantiated and has status only as a speculation.â€ Major Features, pp. 118, 119.

But listen to Huxley’s circular reasoning on it. He says:

â€œOn the basis of our present knowledge natural selection is bound to produce genetic adaptations: and genetic adaptations are thus presumptive evidence for the efficiency of natural selection.â€ Evolution in Action, p. 48.

Did you follow that gem of logic? His proof for natural selection is adaptation or change in the organism, but the change is produced by natural selection! In other words: A–>B; therefore B–>A. His â€œproofâ€ proves nothing. Were the changes produced by natural selection, or did he invent natural selection to explain the changes? It is just as likely that the changes produced the natural selection theory. The ludicrous thing is that even the changes from species to species have never been verified. As it has been shown already, there is not one shred of fossil evidence or living evidence that any species has changed into another. (Museums are filled with manmade lies.) So Huxley’s proofs for natural selection are changes, which never happened, and the changes, which never happened, are offered as proof for natural selection. Surely this is the most vacuous logic to be found in a science textbook.

Myth, speculation, hoax, magic, rubbish, garbage ar good words to use in exchange for macro evolution.

Are LSU professors breaking the 8th commandment?
From the Sabbath School Quarterly

Read Numbers 25:6â€“18. How do we understand what was going on here? What lessons can we take away from this story?

[This is the story of the whoredoms Israel had with the Midianite women at Peor where they even bowed down to worship false gods.] Continuing the extract:

Though the text doesnâ€™t come out and explicitly say it, one could read into the text that the Israelite man, Zimri, was having a sexual relationship with the woman when Phinehas came into the tent and thrust his javelin through them both. However harsh all this might seem, think about the circumstances. The whole camp is weeping and pleading with the Lord because of what was happening, and this manâ€”so audacious and open in his sinâ€”brings this Midianite woman into the camp before all of them and then takes her into the tent and has sexual relations with her. All the while a plague is ravaging the camp! What made it even worse was that Zimri came from a house of princes; that is, he was part of royal stock and thus should have known better. He must have been so deceived, so consumed with lust, that the sight of the camp weeping before the tabernacle didnâ€™t slow him down at all.

All through the Bible, we see examples of how sin clouds the reasoning powers and leads people to do some of the most unthinking and irrational things. Think of Cain, of David with Bathsheba, of Judas betraying Jesus. No wonder the Bible, time and again, warns us against sin. Itâ€™s not that God canâ€™t forgive our sin; itâ€™s that the sin can so warp us that we can get to the point that we donâ€™t even see it as sin any longer.

What is the relevance? There are some today who are “princes” in Israel: like college professors, pastors, conference and union officials )eg presidents).

Yet these people are so deceived that they engage in daring exploits in the very face of the congregation and believe that they should be accepted. People like Whisby, Greer, Bradley, Carl and Bravus openly flaunt their whoredoms with evolution and expect that they should be accepted and remain in princely positions. They want to be teachers in Israel and claim to be teaching the things of God but instead they are joined to Baalpeor.

I am willing to come out and say, unlike many will indeed, that these college trained SDAs especially, who should be teaching the things of God to the people, have left God and joined with Baalpeor.

And like Zimri they have no shame, being boldfaced in their rebellion and expect the congregation to be thrilled by their daring. Yet there is one omnipotent One, who neither slumbers nor sleeps, who takes faithful records, with unerring precision, who will call them one day to account.

Their recompence, like Zimri, will be their destruction and how sad it will be, when they could have been saved.

Are LSU professors breaking the 8th commandment?
@Carl: Carl,

You have not gotten it, you have lingered too long at the forbidden tree. Please read this carefully and answer these questions. The assumption is that you believe that both God and Satan exist.

1) Can God be trusted?
2) Are you or any person smarter than God?
3) Can Satan be trusted?
4) Are you or any person on earth smarter than Satan?
5) Can Satan deceive people? Hint! Revelation 12:9
6) Did Satan deceive one-third of the angels?
7) Did Satan deceive sinless Eve?
8 ) Can Satan tamper with evidence and with nature? (Ask Job)
9) What did Eve aspire for in Genesis 3:6? (name 3 things and focus on the third)
10) In Romans 1:22 what is the description of those who profess the third?

In light of these 10 thoughts, can you say that simply because you “see” or “heard” or “read” of convincing evidence for an old earth and for evolution, that it is possible for you and others of like bent to be deceived?

a) How should we conduct ourselves (2 Corinthians 5:7 KJV)?
b) What happens if we do not follow 2 Cor 5:7? (Read Heb 11:6, 3)

In summary, the many Christians who have been seduced at the tree of knowledge of good and evil flattered themselves that they can find something that goes beyond the word of God. Either by pride, pursuit of self exaltation, hero worship of the outstanding or whatever else the motive, many who should be praising God for His wondrous works and His dealings with us are rejecting His pure and unambiguous statements. Thus the servant of the Lord was instructed to call it the worst kind of infidelity. It seems akin to witchcraft and idolatry of the kind the ante-deluvians participated in before the flood.

It is my sincere advice that you and Bravus and company humble yourselves in the sight of God and confess to Him that you had gone too far and now you are prepared to follow His word implicitly, without straining it to support man’s rebellious theories. He will be sure to forgive!